Friday 25 November 2011 14.03 EST
First published on Friday 25 November 2011 14.03 EST

It's a sad day when a non-profit organisation devoted to campaigning for freedom of the press recommends that the freedom of thousands of journalists be restricted. But that's what happened yesterday, when Reporters Sans Frontieres (RSF) issued a statement calling on editors to stop sending female journalists to cover the protests in Egypt's Tahrir Square. The sexual assault of Caroline Sinz, a reporter for public TV station France 3, meant it was too dangerous for women to be covering the Cairo uprisings. RSF's statement said: "This is at least the third time a woman reporter has been sexually assaulted since the start of the Egyptian revolution. Media should take this into account and for the time being stop sending female journalists to cover the situation in Egypt."

All journalists – men and women, producers and reporters, cameramen, photographers and fixers – know the risks involved in working in a hostile environment. The editors who send us generally know them too. With proper training, funding and a good support team around us both at home and in the field, we can minimise these risks. That's not to downplay them. In the revolutions of the Arab spring in particular, they have been very real, and female journalists have faced specific challenges. Sinz was attacked only hours after Egyptian-American digital journalist Mona Eltahawy reported she had been repeatedly "groped" while detained by Egyptian policemen. This follows the high profile sexual assault of CBS News reporter Lara Logan, who was attacked near Tahrir Square in February, on the day Hosni Mubarak fell from power.

The threat to women is undeniable and should not be underestimated. But then again, so is the threat to men. In 2011 so far, 58 journalists have been killed on the job, only two of them female. Yet I see no statement from RSF urging men not to be sent into the field.

It has taken years for female journalists to convince their editors they should be treated no differently from men. The success of foreign correspondents such as Channel 4 News's Lindsey Hilsum, Sky's Alex Crawford, the BBC World Service's Jill McGivering and the FT's Kathrin Hille have shown us that these efforts are justified. In any situation, a diverse mix of journalists will better serve the public. Female journalists hold a different set of cards to their male counterparts, and are using them to give a broader and more nuanced picture of the world we live in. This is particularly the case in some parts of the Islamic world, where half the population is effectively shut off from speaking to male journalists. But female journalists and their crew have been able to gain access to female activists, and to record the experiences of ordinary women who are living through extraordinary times.

This year, it's been relatively rare to hear the voices of female citizens of Arab spring countries. If women journalists are told it's too dangerous for them to go there, those voices are likely to be silenced altogether. Our perceived weakness can also sometimes work to our advantage: I've made films in hostile environments where I've been able to put tough, bold questions to dangerous and difficult people. I'm sure that in many cases they granted me the interview because they assumed that, as a woman, I must be innocuous and unthreatening. I don't think a male reporter would have been given the same opportunity.

Later this morning, RSF issued a second statement: "It is more dangerous for a woman than a man to cover the demonstrations in Tahrir Square. That is the reality and the media must face it," the modified release read. "It is the first time that there have been repeated sexual assaults against women reporters in the same place. The media must keep this in mind when sending staff there." Their position is clear, and still discriminatory: editors shouldn't be sending female staff to cover the protests, and the women who do go there to work as reporters have been warned. Does that mean that now if another female journalist is attacked in Tahrir Square, it will be her fault?

If RSF really wanted to protect women working for the media in Tahrir Square, it could campaign for editors to spend more money on the teams they send there. Sinz and Logan were both assaulted after they were separated from their camera operators. If female journalists were supported by larger teams, then the likelihood of being attacked in this way could be minimised. Instead, RSF is saying the only way to protect women reporters is to impose wholesale discrimination against them.

It's profoundly disappointing, and, for once, I hope that no editor is listening to them.